Back on December 29, 2007, on Patriot’s Corner Forum, I posted a letter entitled: “Jim Campbell’s Letter to His Attorney”.
Here is the final paragraph of that letter:
. . . . In closing, as a consequence of the media’s exposure of criminal acts by Declaration Foundation, together with the the on-going “lack of candor”, the misrepresentations, the twisting of the facts and percentages, exaggerations, Simcox’s needless “name-calling” of his adversaries, the failure/refusal to disclose pertinent information and to answer legitimate questions have, cummulatively, had the effect of “turning off” potential donors - thus making it more and more likely that my donation (in what I anticipated would be a monument to the financial and personal sacrifice of thousands of like-minded patriots), will have been squandered in a seemingly, well-intentioned, but short-lived “monument to deceit” on the border. It is clear to me now that this fence project was conceived as a grand facade - a scheme - to attract endless streams of donations from the public who placed blind faith (as I did) in both the sincerity and trustworthiness of its promoters. A project that was intially represented to me personally by Kunz (and to the public via website and media announcements, etc.) to be of a viable, credible, “Israeli-style” fence - and of a sufficient 10-mile length - thus enabling it to stand up to public and media scrutiny -has turned out to be a .9 of a mile of fractionally completed “demonstration fence”and 10 miles of barbed wire cattle fence, which Simcox has described as “Phase One” of the fence project. The .9 of a mile of fence has languished in an on-going state of distress and/or inactivity since mid-February. I am reminded of this every month when I make an $850 interest payment on a loan that is consuming my equity in my home.
There could well be NO Statute of Limitions concern given the following:
“In the U.S., when a lawyer or law firm fraudulently presents facts to court in a matter, the act is a crime deemed so severe and fundamentally opposed to the operation of justice that it is not subject to any statute of limitation.”
I have amended paragraph #18 of my Draft Indictment so as to put this “legal technicality” in to play:
18.-——In May, 2007, Mr. Campbell filed a civil complaint against Defendants SIMCOX, LEWIS, KUNZ, and SHELDON alleging the fraudulent inducement of Mr. Campbell’s $100,000. donation. Defendant SIMCOX mal-appropriated $30,900. of the MCDC donors’ money to pay for the costs of these defendants collective defense. Additionally, Defendant Simcox, “being first duly sworn upon my oath”, fraudulently presented unconditional statements fact to the court in his attorney’s “ANSWER TO PLAINTIFFS AMENDED COMPLAINT. Likewise, Defendant Kunz (representing himself) fraudulently presented statements of fact to the court in his MOTION TO QUASH SERVICE OF PROCESS. Mr. Campbell then realized the futility of attempting to obtain legal redress in the civil arena and thereafter dismissed his civil suit.